106 votes

I Will NOT Vote for anyone except Ron Paul...Not Mitt, not anyone even if

Rand is his VP. No one but Ron Paul, at the top of the ticket. No way, no how. No deals, no compromises. Period. Do I make myself clear?



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

...

...

jj

You realize that if Ron loses

You realize that if Ron loses the nomination he is retiring from politics, right? How would his being the Vice President of the United States be somehow worse than not being in politics at all? How would voting for that ticket make us "Paulbots"?

"The casualty of partisanship is objectivity."

Ron can still be a statesman

Ron can still be a statesman out of office and continue to spread the message of liberty.

Taking a deal like this with a flip-flooper and anti-natural rights person like Mittens would repudiate his entire career. You know the President makes the decisions, right, not the VP?

After we rejected the establishment, rejected making deals with them for years, we make a deal and then go along with it just because a Paul is on the ticket as VP, what John Adams called the most useless position ever devised by the mind of man? That is a "Paulbot".

Did you not hear Mittens' wanting to basically bomb Iran and Syria last night?

Mittens, Frothy and Newt would all be disasters.

If you imagine the Vice

If you imagine the Vice Presidency to be a position that is completely without power or influence, you are mistaken. Sure, the President is the one who makes all the decisions, but you don't think the VP has any influence?

Also, Vice Presidents often go on to become the President. Maybe we all know Ron would make a great President, but the people at large do not. Being the VP would be a great way to build his credentials in the minds of people who care about that sort of thing, AND legitimize and spread the message of liberty.

You really think a retired Ron Paul would have viable platform to spread the message of liberty?

I never said I wanted Mitt, Frothy or Newt to win. I simply said that if Ron doesn't get the nomination, I'd prefer he be VP over nothing.

"The casualty of partisanship is objectivity."

Ron is 76 years old. This is

Ron is 76 years old. This is his last go around. If Mittens wins and is re-elected, Ron could not run until he is 84.

VP has very little power. You are thinking about Cheney, who was actually the de facto president as W. was just the front man for his daddy's team. Look at the current dummy, Biden, probably the dumbest VP we've ever had and someone who it is clear Obama rarely listens to. I can run through some of the others like Quayle, Gore, etc., but that would make my head hurt too much. Adams was 100 percent correct in his statement.

Ron would be much more effective as a retired statesman with his principles in tact over someone who makes a deal and a majority of his backers leave him or refuse to support him.

The biggest name of the game in politics today is consistently. Most of them flip more than flipper. Folks want someone who is consistent and a straight shooter. Ron basically said this in the debate. Making a deal with the establishment would repudiate his track record of bucking the establishment.

You are wrong...I stopped compromising years ago...

it gets us nowhere and nothing.

I think that Ron Paul not

I think that Ron Paul not getting anything out of the nomination process would be worse than being VP or some other position.

"The casualty of partisanship is objectivity."

Ditto.

Ditto.

*Sigh* I'm so sick of these threads...

Get this straight folks, there WILL NOT BE any Paul-Romney or Romney-Paul ticket! EVER! Same with a Paul endorsement of Romney in exchange for some other position, or a position for Rand, or anything. Not going to happen! EVER! You're worrying and arguing about a hypothetical scenario that has ZERO probability of actually occurring.

It bothers me that folks would even conceive of the possibility that Paul would accept something like this. He wouldn't, and he won't. It's the white house or bust. I am 100% certain that Paul will not endorse or join with any other GOP candidate if he's not the nominee, and I'm 100% certain that if Paul is the nominee he will not choose his running mate from among the other GOP candidates - the only exception being if there's a brokered convention where he has no choice but to accept one of them in order to get the nomination, but not the other around (i.e. Paul will not give his support to another nominee in exchange for a VP slot for himself).

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Yes. The White House or Bust...

you get it.

I often wonder..

What Ron Pauls strategy truly is. He is the wisest man up there for sure.

He isnt going to be in office after this election unless he is President. Is he setting things up for Rand? Its my personal belief he thinks that he will have a break out moment.

His response to King last night about the media was absolutely awesome.

I will not vote for anyone but Ron either.. but the way I see it, Ron is my president. If he asks me to vote for Romney, Im voting for Romney. I flat out refuse to vote for Santorum or Gingrich. I will vote for Obama before I vote for either one of those clowns. Santorum is a scary S.O.B. all night he had to defend himself because of his corruption. He is the polar opposite of what America is all about. He is worse than Dubya.

As much as I want Obama out of the WH.. I couldnt vote for Gingrich or Santorum. Ever. The only way Romney gets my vote is if Ron asks us to support him.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Wow, the media finally found a winning marginalization strategy

Even Ron's supporters are talking about VP.

2nd place is the first loser. We are going to win. Get off the train if you want to settle for something less.

Bravo.

You get it.

So you trust Ron Paul enough

So you trust Ron Paul enough to vote for him no matter who he chooses as VP but you don't trust Ron Paul enough to vote for a ticket on which he willingly accepted the VP slot? I don't get that, but I respect your opinion.

Do you really believe RP will accept VP?

On Romney's or anyone's ticket? Do you?

I think this is a good distraction

I don't believe there is an alliance, but I love how its driving everyone crazy and getting Ron in the news more.

Rick is whining, Newt is complaining, the establishment is panicking and the MSMs can't figure out what is going on.

Romney is the establishment's best chance to beat us and now Ron might even find his way on ticket even if he loses!

I think the truth is that in racing you draft off of who you can when you can. And just because you're drafting off someone doesn't mean you won't pass them when you get the chance.

Good job keeping everyone distracted Ron!

Only Ron Paul

Your mind won't let you vote for lies when you know the truth.

Rowdius's picture

Let's not assume the worst

Let's not assume the worst about this Romney friendliness.

Ron Paul is in this to win. But the path to winning is through a brokered convention. And to win a brokered convention, you need to sway other delegates to your side.

Maybe the Romney friendliness is about gaining the favor, not of Romney, but of his delegates.

answer to Romney friendship

Q: are you in an alliance with Mitt Romney?

A: No, in fact, in the state of Virginia, I am the only GOP candidate who made the effort to get on the ballot to oppose Mitt Romney. Why don't you ask Newt and Rick if THEY are in an alliance with Mitt?

Why do you want to give Romney a free pass again?

Why don't you ask Romney is he has an alliance with any of the candidates? Why lay the burden and humiliation on his rivals, whom are in some way conservative?

jj

If we do our job...

then Romney will be hoping to join the Ron Paul ticket as VP (which would never happen, btw)

Focus, people!

Rule of the jungle

Rule of the Jungle: "The strength of the Wolf is the Pack." Is it wise for us to be fighting among ourselves?

Here, here!

Either Ron Paul is on the ballot in November or I write him in.

Regardless, I'll vote for no one else. No ex-governors, no slick hot-shot new Senator wanna-be lifetime politicians.

I'll not waste my vote.

Rand is almost as bad as Santorum and Romney is not worth discussing.

See, the truth is- THEY don't need our votes anyway. If moRomney or Obama get elected nothing will change. The face may change but the machine will continue doing what it has always done.

"Rand is almost as bad as

"Rand is almost as bad as Santorum"

uh, no, not true

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

Give him time.

You'll see.

I WOULD vote for Romney IF

Crystal

clear.

Waste of forum space...

Since you don't like the idea, what is the point of bringing it up?

I will vote for whomever I deem best to pursue the cause of liberty and restore constitutional government to the United States.

Your OP is premature and irrelevant since we're not even close to the end of the primaries yet... but I hope it made you feel better.

NOTE: I am not advocating violence in any way. The content of the post is for intellectual, theoretical, and philosophical discussion. FEDS, please don't come to my house.

I don't need to post here to feel better about anything...

I am making a point about where I stand. I too will vote for "whomever I deem best to pursue the cause of liberty and restore constitutional government to the United States."

If you consider that "premature and irrelevant" then so be it. I believe otherwise, and it seems that many others do also. We sense something going awry and are concerned. My vote is not for sale to the highest bidder.

Are you making an empty point like a good politician?

If you genuinely feel that strongly about Romney, then I don't see you espousing meaningful, genuine repulsion of Romney. Hence, I can see why someone would deem what you say are irrelevant - talk is talk.

jj